2005年07月26日

ストックウェルのshoot to kill ――彼は彼らを私服警官と認識していたのか?

さっきの続き――

「駅で止まっていれば撃たれなかっただろうと考えられることから,男性がなぜ止まらなかったのかがもっと注目されてよいと私は思う」という前提(実は多少無理があるが……止まっていても撃たれていた可能性もあるので。そしてそれは実は重要なポイント)での話のパート2。「彼は自分に『止まれ』と言っているのが警官だと思っていなかった」という可能性について。Yahoo JAPANにあった毎日新聞記事(25日付け)には次のようにある。
特殊銃撃部隊員が私服だったことが悲劇を招いた可能性もある。隊員らはTシャツにジーンズの「ぶっきらぼうな若者姿」(タイムズ紙)で、ジメネゼスさんは、急に銃を取り出した不審な男たちをギャング団と間違えたかもしれない。


まず,毎日新聞記事において,タイムズから引用されている「ぶっきらぼうな若者姿」(<しかしすごい日本語だなこれは)が,正確に,どういう英語で記されているのかを見なければならない。

というわけで,タイムズ・オンラインにおいて「shoot to kill」で検索を行なったが,それらしき記述は確認できなかった。また「police」でも検索をしてみたが,それらしき記述は確認できなかった。

私が見落としているのかもしれないし(この場合はどうかコメント欄でご指摘ください),オンライン版には掲載されていない部分(囲み記事である場合,写真のキャプションである場合など)だったのかもしれない。

興味深かったのが,事件の発生を伝える記事の中の目撃者証言である。
Mark Whitby, speaking to BBC News 24, reported the man was shot five times at close range after he had jumped on a train.
_
Mr Whitby said he was sitting on the Tube train reading his paper as it was stationary with its doors open in Stockwell station.
_
He said he heard people shouting "get down, get down!"
_
He said: "An Asian guy ran on to the train. As he ran, he was hotly pursued by what I knew to be three plainclothes police officers."
_
He tripped and was also pushed to the floor and one of the officers shot him five times.
_
"One of the police officers was holding a black automatic pistol in his left hand. They held it down to him and unloaded five shots into him. I saw it. He's dead, five shots, he's dead."
_
He reported the man did not seem to be carrying a weapon or wearing a rucksack.
_
"Somebody in plain clothes who I thought was a civilian cop had his gun out and started shooting and told us to get out."

_
BBC News 24の取材に応じたマーク・ウィトビーさんは(→BBC記事はこちらです),男性は地下鉄に飛び乗った後,至近距離から5回撃たれたと述べている。ウィトビーさんは地下鉄がストックウェル駅に停車してドアを開けていたとき,座席に座って新聞を読んでいた。そして人々が「伏せろ! 伏せろ!」と叫ぶのを聞いたという。「アジア系の男性【ウィトビーさんは射殺されたブラジル人男性を「アジア系」と認識している。英国で「アジア系」という場合は南アジア系のことをいう】が駆け込んできた。走りながら彼は3人に追いかけられていたが,私は追いかけているのは私服警官だろうと思った。」彼はつまづいて転び,床に組み伏せられた。警官の1人が彼を5度撃った。「警官の一人は左手に黒いオートマチックの拳銃を持っていた。彼らはそれを男性に突きつけて5発撃ちこんだ。私はそれを見た。男性は死んだ。5発撃たれて死んだ。ウィトビーさんはまた,男性は武器を持っているとかリュックサックを背負っているとかいったようには見えなかったと述べている。「私服を着た人が,私は私服警官だと思ったが,その人が銃を取り出して撃ち始め,そして私たちに下車するようにと言った。」
_
--'Bomber' shot dead, arrests made: witness reports (By Times Online and agencies) (July 22, 2005)


同じ記事から別の証言。
Chris Martin said he was waiting on the northbound Northern line platform at Stockwell station and a train had pulled in when several men burst on to the platform about 20 yards from him. "There was a lot of shouting, I thought it was football fans or something," he said.
_
"There was obviously some sort of altercation going on, and then they came flying on to the platform and these guys just threw this man into the open doors of the train. "Then I heard shots, I thought it was three but someone else said five.
_
"It sounded like a silencer gun going off, and then there was blind panic, with people shouting and screaming and just running away.
_
"I didn't actually see the gun, but I heard this 'bang, bang, bang'.
_
"When I left the station a guy called Mark who had been on the train said they had shot the man dead, no doubt about it."

_
クリス・マーティンさんはストックウェル駅の北行きのホームで地下鉄を待っていた。地下鉄がホームに入ってきて停車すると,マーティンさんからおよそ20ヤード離れたところに,数人の男がなだれ込んできた。「すごく騒いでいたので,サッカーのファンか何かだろうと思いました。」「何か言い争っているようでした。それからホームになだれ込んできて,男性を,開いていた列車のドアに投げ込んだんです。それから銃声がしました。3発だと思いましたが,5発という人もいます。」「サイレンサーをつけた銃のようでした。それからはもうとにかくパニックです。人々が大声をあげて金切り声をあげ,走っていった。」「拳銃は見ませんでしたが,バン,バン,バンという音は聞きました。」「駅を出ると,列車に乗っていたマークという男性が,彼らは男性を撃ち殺した,間違いないと言っていました。」
_
--'Bomber' shot dead, arrests made: witness reports (By Times Online and agencies) (July 22, 2005)


2番目の証言(マーティンさん)にある「サッカーのファンか何かだと思った」ということは興味深い。サッカーの試合なんか行なわれてない金曜日の真昼間に(<実は私は銃撃があった正確な時間を把握していないのだが,この記事に,「朝出勤する途中で銃撃を目撃した人」の証言が掲載されている),他人に「サッカーのファンだと思った」という印象を与えるような騒ぎ方をするのは,時によっては「フーリガン」と呼ばれるような人たちだろう。推測ではあるが。(でもそんなに的外れじゃないと思うよ。)

マーティンさんがそう思ったということは,私服警官たちは,少なくとも見た目,そういう感じだったという推測は,タイムズの記事からはなりたつのではないかと思う。

「そういう感じ」とは……白人,何か強そう,ラフな服装,など。毎日新聞記事にある「ぶっきらぼうな若者姿」の英語での表現は結局見つかっていないけれど,ひょっとしたらそういうことじゃないかと思う。(というか,私はこの「ぶっきらぼうな若者」とはthug/thuggishもしくはその近辺の語ではないかと推測しているわけだが,今のところアタリはないのです。)

仮に,彼ら私服警官が,ぱっと見フーリガンみたいに見える強そうな白人男性たちだったと仮定してみよう。

その場合,射殺されたブラジル人男性が逃げ出したことは至極当然のことである。見た目フーリガン,中身極右という連中が「移民」をつかまえてぼこぼこにすることは,残念ながら珍しい話ではない――新聞記事になる程度には“珍しい”けれど,「ロンドンではそのようなことは考えられない」ということではない。

特に,ここ数年BNPなど極右政党が,少しずつではあるけれど,都市部でも支持を伸ばしてきているし,さらに「イスラム・テロ」という雑な理解が一般的にまかり通っている中,肌の色が浅黒いだけで襲撃の対象になるのではないかとびくびくしている人がいることは当然だ。

腕っ節の強そうな白人に尾行され(それに気づいていたにせよ気づいていないにせよ),さらに大声で「止まれ」と言われて追いかけられて,パニックにならない「移民」は,あまりいないんじゃないかと思う。ましてや止まれるかどうか?

話がそれるけど,私も朝の9時ごろにハックニーの公園を歩いているときに,後ろからものすごくでっかい声で知らない人に何度も「オイ! オイ!(英語でもOi!です)」と大声で呼びかけられて,ちょっとパニックになりかけたことがある。「歩いてくる途中で何か落としたのかも」と意を決して振り向いてみれば,その人は立ち止まった私に向かって「あんたじゃないよ」と笑いもせずに大声で言って,信じられないくらいの大きなストライドですたすたと歩いていって(身長190センチって感じ),ずっと前方にいた人に向かってさらに大声で叫び続けていた。

……話を元に戻さなければ。とにかく,知らない人・何者なのかわからない人に大声で呼びかけられてすっと止まれる人は,あんまりいないんじゃないかと私は思う。

今回射殺された男性を追いかけて射殺した警察官は,警察の対テロ特殊部隊のメンバーで,SASの訓練を受けていた。

なお,どの記事で読んだのかわからなくなってしまったが,ひとつだけ,私服警官が「止まれ,武装警察だ!」と言ったというものがあった。しかし私が読んだ目撃者証言にはそれがない。ホームにいたマーティンさんの証言にも,彼らが「武装警察だ」と言ったということは書かれていない。もちろん,実際にそう言ったのにマーティンさんには聞こえてなかっただけかもしれない。「サッカーファンかと思った」という時点で,マーティンさんはそんなに大きな関心を払っていたわけではないことが読み取れるし。

しかし,shoot to kill policyで人を殺す権限を与えられている警察官が,自分は何者かを明示すらせずに「怪しい」と考えた者を追跡し,相手に弁解の余地も与えず,「身体につけているかもしれない爆弾を爆発させないように」との理由で頭部を撃つことが,職務規定上は可能である,ということ自体が,とてもおそろしいことではないか。

なお,現在ロンドンで警察の特殊部隊によって実行されているshoot to kill(頭部を撃つ)の根拠は,「自爆の意思がある者は,意識があればいつでも自爆するので」ということである。

--------------------
読んだ記事一覧:

July 22, 2005
'Bomber' shot dead, arrests made: witness reports
By Times Online and agencies
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-20749-1704443,00.html

July 23, 2005
Suspect shot dead 'had no bomb'
By Adam Fresco, Rajeev Syal and Steve Bird
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-20749-1705147,00.html

July 23, 2005
Stockwell death shows dangers of shoot-to-kill
By Philippe Naughton, Times Online
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-20749-1706117,00.html
For the officers of the 'Metropolitan Police specialist armed units, it's not about shooting to kill, but shooting to protect: an entirely new threat has brought a new level of response.
_
But the dangers of the tightened rules of engagement brought in to deal with the phenomenon of suicide bombers have been laid bare with the news that a man shot dead at Stockwell Tube station yesterday morning had nothing to do with Thursday's failed terrorist attacks on London but had simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time – and had then apparently panicked when accosted by officers.
_
The Met described the man's death as a "tragedy". Witnesses had recounted how the man, said to be of South Asian appearance, was chased down into the bowels of the Tube station and jumped on to a Northern Line train, closely followed by armed officers. He was then, one witness said, shot five times in the head at point-blank range.
_
......


July 24, 2005
Police shot wrong man
Jonathan Calvert and David Leppard
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-523-1706793,00.html

July 23, 2005
Stockwell shooting was mistake, says Met
By Philippe Naughton, Times Online
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-20749-1706021,00.html

July 24, 2005
Hair trigger tragedy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-1501-1706323,00.html
Even in the tense and surreal atmosphere affecting London, the killing by police of a suspected terrorist, pumping five bullets into him at close range, stood out as a remarkable event. The news of Friday's shooting of the man at Stockwell Tube station, which quickly flashed around the world, underlined the extent to which a Rubicon had been crossed in the fight against terrorism. Even for those who have long since abandoned the avuncular image of the British bobby, this was a significant moment. It reinforced the impression of a city under siege.
_
Yesterday's revelation that the dead man was unconnected with the attempted terror attacks last Thursday represents a huge setback. Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, originally said the shooting was "directly linked" to the terror attacks on London. Now it appears that the only direct link was that the victim lived in the same property as a terrorist suspect. If the police are operating a shoot-to-kill policy against suspected suicide bombers, they have to be sure of their targets.
_
An innocent man, possibly a South American according to some reports, scared out of his wits by armed police, was chased into the Tube, pinned down and shot. He was, indirectly, a victim of two terror attacks on London in the space of a fortnight and the mood of paranoia they have generated. Directly, however, he was a victim of police failure. Serious questions need to be asked by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.
_
Nobody pretends that these things are easy. Had the man not been stopped, and had he turned out to be a suicide bomber, the police would have faced even more criticism. As Shami Chakrabarti, director of the human rights organisation Liberty, put it last night: "Our hearts go out to the family of the dead man and to the officers involved in this tragic incident. No one should rush to judgment . . . These are knife-edge split-second decisions made in moments of grave danger. We have a massive shared interest in the protection of innocent lives."
_
Even so, Friday's shooting generated unease even before yesterday's revelation. ...


July 24, 2005
Mistake puts gun policy in doubt
Maurice Chittenden
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-523-1706244,00.html
...
_
Scotland Yard insisted at first yesterday that it was not a case of mistaken identity because the dead man had been seen leaving an address in south London where police had been carrying out surveillance.
_
A Yard spokesman said yesterday morning: "The man who was shot was under police observation. He had emerged from a house that itself was under observation in connection to the bombing incidents.
_
"He was followed by surveillance officers to the station. His clothing and his behaviour at the station added to their suspicions.
_
"The investigation into the circumstances of the death is being pursued and is subject to scrutiny through the IPCC."
_
Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan police commissioner, was all smiles when he met a television camera crew. "The Met is playing out of its socks. I am very pleased with what is happening,” he said.
_
By late afternoon the awful truth had dawned. Not only was the dead man not a bomber; he was believed to be a Brazilian.
_
Whether by coincidence or to provide a smokescreen, newspapers were tipped off about an impending raid on a house in Scotia Road, Tulse Hill, south London. Police fired teargas into the house and moved dozens of people from the area in a show of force.
_
An hour later, just before 5pm, Scotland Yard released a statement saying the dead man had no connection with the terrorist investigation.
_
...


July 25, 2005
Oops, sorry, won't do. We can't just shrug our shoulders over this shooting
Tim Hames
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-1054-1707225,00.html
THE POLICE, according to a Sunday newspaper yesterday, fear a "backlash in the Muslim community" after the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent Brazilian electrician, at Stockwell Tube station on Friday. What the police should fear is a backlash from the entire civilised community. Yet there is no evidence that either the politicians or the public will provide it. The theme has been that this was a tragic "mistake", but one which was unavoidable, even inevitable, in the current climate.
_
The breadth of the coalition of "Oh dear, but . . . " in this instance is astonishing. Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, who can normally be relied on for controversy, has declined to condemn either the specifics of this event or the shoot-to-kill strategy behind it. The Liberal Democrats, whose purpose in life, surely, is to defend civil rights in difficult times, are similarly reticent. Muslim Labour MPs, such as Khalid Mahmood have urged caution. Even Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, has given warning against a "rush to judgment". It has been left to the Brazilian Government to express anger about the manner in which Mr Menezes died.
_
It should not be angry alone. I am a hardliner on the War on Terror and remain a hawk on the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath. But if al-Qaeda has created an atmosphere in which an ordinary person can have five bullets pumped into him by the police, and society shrugs its shoulders, then the terrorists have already won a modest victory.
_
The inconsistency bordering on callousness of Scotland Yard has been breathtaking. It was initially suggested that Mr Menezes was under surveillance and had been approached after he walked from his residence in Stockwell to the Tube station. It is now clear that he started his trip from Tulse Hill, where he had stayed at someone else's home, was watched, was noted wearing bulky clothing, yet was allowed (despite the slaughter at Tavistock Square on July 7 and the attempted blast on a double-decker at Hackney last Thursday) to board a bus for a 15-minute journey and was challenged only when he sought to buy an Underground ticket. Why was someone whom the police continue to insist was a "potential suicide-bomber" no menace on the No 2 bus, but an urgent threat who had to be taken out when moving in the direction of the Northern Line?
_
And then there was the attempt to "spin" this situation to suit the police immediately after the shooting. It must have been obvious within minutes that the man concerned had no explosives on him and it is highly likely that he had identifying documentation. Yet for hours on Friday police sources were briefing that this shooting was "directly connected" to their inquiries into the botched bombings of July 21 and over the weekend the implication rumbled on that he had lived in, or perhaps near, or somewhere quite close to, multi-occupancy accommodation that had been deemed "suspicious".
_
This attempt to blame Mr Menezes for his own death continues unabated. It was hinted that he might have been an illegal immigrant, as if that justifies what occurred. It has been argued that it was "irresponsible" of him to wear a quilted jacket in July, as if that were a crime. There are, furthermore, "no excuses", it is intoned, for the fact that he ran when armed plainclothed police officers shouted at him.
_
I don't know about you, but if I found myself minding my own business on the São Paulo metro and was suddenly confronted by men wearing no uniforms but wielding weapons, screaming at me in Portuguese, I too might choose to bolt for it. It was not merely the police but their victim who had to make a split-second decision.
_
...


July 25, 2005
Shoot-to-kill policy is based on Israeli model
By Dominic Kennedy and Stewart Tendler
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-20749-1707481,00.html
……これをわざわざ読むならガーディアン記事(Seconds to decide if suspect is suicide threat)を読んだ方が,得られる情報量という点でもよいです。流し読みができる方はどちらも読んで損はないと思います。

July 24, 2005
Shoot to kill error echoes Irish dirty war
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,2-523-1706149,00.html
……これは私はあとで熟読しなければ。

なお,今回,毎日新聞の山科記者さんの「ぶっきらぼうな若者姿」というすばらしい日本語表現のおかげでタイムズをざーっと読んだわけですが,今回の件についてタイムズは,「警察は間違ったことをした」というスタンスで,かなり力強い記事を多く出しています。ただし根本的に「対テロ戦争」にサポーティヴであることは何ら変わっていない――というかその姿勢はますます鮮明になっているかもしれないという感じで,私はどっと疲れましたが。

なお,BBCは概して,こういうときには政権のmouthpieceになってしまうメディアで,今回もやはりそうだという印象。BBCを読むならタイムズの方がよいなあと思いました。

……と,珍しくタイムズを読んでいるので,そういうことだけはしっかりとメモ。

----------------
■トラックバック
追ってきたらとりあえず逃げるのが人の性か?@「Not a new England --おまえをメディアウオッチ」さん
posted by nofrills at 01:46| todays_news_from_uk | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする
×

この広告は180日以上新しい記事の投稿がないブログに表示されております。